Piss off people - obey the speed limit

damien

4 lanes. 4 cars obeying the speed limit. 100s of pissed off motorists.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5366552067462745475

Breaker breaker, looks like we've got ourselves a convoy.

Diarmsquid

Actuallly my parents and I were driving on the Swords road once and decided to slow down to 90 (the road sign) and people were going mad because we were slowing them up. Giving the two fingers passing by and everything.

Manic Moran

Idiots. That sort of thing will get you pulled over. What they don't realise in their attempts to 'obey the law' is that there is another law which says that if you're slower, pull over to the right. That law does not become nullified simply because the guy trying to overtake you is speeding.

I am aware of instances where people held up by drivers who don't yield call the highway patrol, and the HP would send an unmarked unit to see what happened. When they failed to yield, they were ticketed.

There are legal defenses for exceeding the speed limit in the US. There is no legal defense for the charge of impeding the flow of traffic.

NTM

damien

Manic Moran wrote:

There are legal defenses for exceeding the speed limit in the US. There is no legal defense for the charge of impeding the flow of traffic.

There are legal defenses for everything otherwise there's no need for court cases or a legal system.

Wertz

Just as well they're better drivers than they are sound recordists, or it'd have turned to tragedy.

Fortunately we only need two cars to do this here. Or a toll plaza...

Sparky

Wertz wrote:

Or a toll plaza...

Nice input there. It's madness with that yoke.

blu_sonic

the same thing happened on the Long Mile road because the speed limit changes from 40(mph) to 30(mph) rather abruptly

Victor

blu_sonic wrote:

rather abruptly

You mean the sign appears "just like that"? :rolleyes:

blu_sonic

well if you've used the strech of road you understand, its outside my old school, its a dual carriage way and there is a 40(mph) sign at the top of the road, and midway there is a sign (between trees) for 30(mph) there used to be a garda catching the cars that were still going 40

rubadub

Manic Moran wrote:

Idiots. That sort of thing will get you pulled over. What they don't realise in their attempts to 'obey the law' is that there is another law which says that if you're slower, pull over to the right. That law does not become nullified simply because the guy trying to overtake you is speeding.

It might not be the law there. If you did it on a motorway in Ireland I do not see how you could be done, if you are both beside each other doing the speed limit what could anybody say? One car is trying to pass the other out. Is the one in the slow lane legally obliged to slow down in this case? I doubt it or there would have to be a set limit they should slow by, i.e. technically they could slow down a tiny bit so they would be side by side for a mile or so still.

Manic Moran wrote:

I am aware of instances where people held up by drivers who don't yield call the highway patrol, and the HP would send an unmarked unit to see what happened. When they failed to yield, they were ticketed.

If the person is on the speed limit I cannot understand why the HP would respond. The person phoning up is basically saying "I made a premeditated decision to break the speed limit but the guy in front prevented me, can you please send out a car to catch them so I can then break the law". The HP could be done for aiding and abetting!

Sam Vimes

Manic Moron wrote:

I am aware of instances where people held up by drivers who don't yield call the highway patrol, and the HP would send an unmarked unit to see what happened. When they failed to yield, they were ticketed.

i doubt that would happen. the slow lane is for people who drive below the limit. if someone was driving at the limit and pulled into the slow lane, they'd be breaking the law. i sincerely doubt the highway patrol would force one person to break the law by driving fast in the slow lane, just so that someone else could break the law by speeding

jdwals

Actually, I for one would be delighted if people obeyed the speed limit. And when I say this, I mean actually drive at the maximum speed allowed! If the road lets you drive at 100kph - then bloody well drive at 100kph! (Weather and road conditions allowing!)
Not 80kph or even 60kph but 100kph!
The type of driving that pi**es me off the most is when I have to drive from Dublin to Kerry and back and get stuck behind some idiot travelling as low as 40kph (yes, they are out there) below the posted speed limit and I can't get past them either due to traffic, lack of overtaking stretches or more likely the tendency of these slower drivers to be so far into the middle of the road, they may as well be driving on the other side of it!
If on the other hand someone is going above the speed limit, I give them as much space as I can to safely overtake and let them on their way. That way, they are happy, I am happy - everyone is happy!

Hobbes

rubadub wrote:

Is the one in the slow lane legally obliged to slow down in this case?

The speed limit is a limit. It is not a target. Just because it says 80 or 120 doesn't mean you have to be running at that speed and anyone who thinks you have to needs to go back for some driving lessons. The exceptions being where you have minimum speed laws (Eg. Motorway is 60kph).

The other lane is an overtaking lane. If you have to break the law to overtake then you shouldn't be in that lane.

If a car is overtaking you it is the proper rules of the road to let them pass, even if this means slowing down. Accelerating to stop them is dangerous driving.

robinph

Hobbes wrote:

The exceptions being where you have minimum speed laws (Eg. Motorway is 60kph).

That isn't a minimum speed limit though, its that your vehicle has to be capable of travelling at at least that speed not that you have to keep to at least that speed. The only place I'm aware of minimum limits is on the outside lanes of the autobahn.

bounty

no, its the fast and slow lane, everyone knows that

Hobbes

robinph wrote:

That isn't a minimum speed limit though, its that your vehicle has to be capable of travelling at at least that speed not that you have to keep to at least that speed.

You do have to keep to at least that speed if it is safe enough to do so (eg. no traffic in front of you). Its the whole point of having cars/bikes that are able to travel that speed on the motorway. Different story when the M50 turns into a car park.

Macha

People who stay in the overtaking lane, without overtaking are breaking the rules of the road. Drivers in private cars are not the Traffic Corps and should not take it upon themselves to start determining whether other people obey the speed limit or not.

However, people do not normally stay in the outside lane just to spite other people - most of the time it's just because they're totally unaware of what's happening around them. What happened to checking the rear-view mirror every minute?!!

Kersh

The speed limit is a limit. It is not a target. Just because it says 80 or 120 doesn't mean you have to be running at that speed and anyone who thinks you have to needs to go back for some driving lessons. The exceptions being where you have minimum speed laws (Eg. Motorway is 60kph).

Yes, but dont forget you can get a driving test fail for not keeping up with the flow of traffic and/or getting up to speed quick enough.

ruprect

Hobbes wrote:

The speed limit is a limit. It is not a target.

Yep

Hobbes wrote:

The other lane is an overtaking lane. If you have to break the law to overtake then you shouldn't be in that lane.

Yes

If a car is overtaking you it is the proper rules of the road to let them pass, even if this means slowing down.

Now it is common sense, but I doubt it is an actual law.

People who stay in the overtaking lane, without overtaking are breaking the rules of the road.

if both cars are 2 abreast on the motorway driving at the speed limit, then there is nothing any highway patrol could do. One is trying to pass out the other and not breaking the law. I doubt the one on the inside is breaking the law, just common sense.

Nightwish

Myself and my boyfriend (who's only driving a week, so a learner) were driving along the bypass outside the town last night, doing exactly the speed limit, which has been reduced for extensive roadwroks on the road, a truck came right up behind the car and started tailgating him and flashing the big lights on top of the cab....f*cking idiot.

ruprect

ruprect wrote:

if both cars are 2 abreast on the motorway driving at the speed limit, then there is nothing any highway patrol could do.

I would imagine one or the other could be done for driving without due care and attention for other users of the road. The rules of the road certainly state that you should not accelerate if a car is overtaking you. If someone is accelrating enough to get by but suddenly both cars are travelling at the same speed, then clearly one or other has declerated to cause the obstruction. Bit like splashing a pedestrian by driving through a puddle (which there have been convictions for) - it's just the high of ignorance.

I think a Garda who was held up by two gob****es staying neck and neck would be able to issue a summons and noone would have any sympathy.

draftdispenser

The laws in this country regarding motoring are fine, its the drivers that need to be sorted out.
I travel alot account of work and one major problem on the roads is not young fast drivers, its the 40+ age group. Alot (not all) have no regard for any one other than themselves.
*They pull out in front of you,
*Drive at stupidly low and dangerous speeds,
*Speed up when you try to over-take them,
*Dont bother using indicatators at all (they assume you know where they are going!)
I know, statistically, majority of road accidents are pinned on young drivers going too fast, or what not, but can anyone answer this..... How many of them accidents involve stupid or dangerous driving by people who got their licence for 5 pound many years ago?
New drivers must sit driving tests, why not all these older generation?

Gegerty

Driving in Australia really changed my attitude on speed limits. Almost everyone keeps to the speed limit on the motorways, even when overtaking. Alot of their roads are 2 laners like ours. You just gotta sit back and relax and keep to the speed limit. I don't have a link but I think its been proven that if everyone kept to the speed limit we'd all get to our destination quicker.

It's not a fast lane by the way, its an overtaking lane. If you're overtaking you still have to stick to the speed limit. The guys in this video are not overtaking they're driving side by side, granted they're sticking to the speed limit but if they're not overtaking they should pull into the left lane. They should get their facts straight before they go putting peoples lives in danger.

tSubh Dearg

Gegerty wrote:

I don't have a link but I think its been proven that if everyone kept to the speed limit we'd all get to our destination quicker.

There was a piece on this on the radio the other day. This guy had driven from Dublin to Portlaoise at the speed limit and over the speed limit. Driving over the speed limit got you there 30 secs faster than driving at the speed limit.

Gegerty

tSubh Dearg wrote:

There was a piece on this on the radio the other day. This guy had driven from Dublin to Portlaoise at the speed limit and over the speed limit. Driving over the speed limit got you there 30 secs faster than driving at the speed limit.

I'm sure everyones seen someone bomb past them only to meet up with the same car at a red light further down the road. You're only getting to your next red light quicker.

draftdispenser

draftdispenser wrote:

I travel alot account of work and one major problem on the roads is not young fast drivers, its the 40+ age group. Alot (not all) have no regard for any one other than themselves.
*They pull out in front of you,
*Drive at stupidly low and dangerous speeds,
*Speed up when you try to over-take them,
*Dont bother using indicatators at all (they assume you know where they are going!)

I completely agree.

I have rarely had a problem with some smartarse kid on the road. If they want to speed along, I will always pull in and let them overtake me.

But I've had plenty of problems with old people sticking to the speed limit or well below and hogging the middle of the road, or some old fellow on a tractor or in a jeep drawing a (badly lit) trailer and crawling along. That sort of driving forces those behind into taking risks. As for the indicators, does anyone ever indicate going into a roundabout anymore?

Gegerty

Deleted User wrote:

does anyone ever indicate going into a roundabout anymore?

Well they shouldn't if they're going straight on. Old people are entitled to podder along if they want. People on Irish roads need to relax a little. OK you'll get stuck behind them until its clear to overtake, get over it. Nobody can argue that young drivers don't speed, myself included until I turned 28 and copped on. Nobody can argue that speed is not the main killer on our roads.

Rovi

tSubh Dearg wrote:

There was a piece on this on the radio the other day. This guy had driven from Dublin to Portlaoise at the speed limit and over the speed limit. Driving over the speed limit got you there 30 secs faster than driving at the speed limit.

Hmmm...
Given that it's approx. 80 kilometres, and it's all motorway with a 120km/h limit, I figure that the guy doing the limit did the journey in 40 minutes, and the guy who did it 30 seconds quicker (39.5 minutes) was doing 121.5km/h.

What a maniac! :eek:

.

Gegerty

Gegerty wrote:

People on Irish roads need to relax a little. OK you'll get stuck behind them until its clear to overtake, get over it.

Around these parts (Kerry), its not that simple. There are plenty of roads around here where you might only get a chance every 5 or 10 miles to overtake, and if someone is plodding along oblivious to you and refusing to pull in then it can force people to overtake on areas where it might be dangerous.

Manic Moran

Commander Vimes wrote:

i doubt that would happen. the slow lane is for people who drive below the limit. if someone was driving at the limit and pulled into the slow lane, they'd be breaking the law. i sincerely doubt the highway patrol would force one person to break the law by driving fast in the slow lane, just so that someone else could break the law by speeding

Well, they do. Evidently we have a difference between Irish and American laws on the issue. (I take it the film wasn't made in Canada?)

http://www.driverightpassleft.com/laws/index.asp

"The Uniform Vehicle Code states:

'Upon all roadways any vehicle proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic ...'

Note that this law refers to the 'normal' speed of traffic, not the 'legal' speed of traffic. The 60 MPH driver in a 55 MPH zone where everybody else is going 65 MPH must move right. "(My bold)

This is the relevant part of the code from my state's (California) law:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=veh&group=21001-22000&file=21650-21664
"(b) If a vehicle is being driven at a speed less than the normal
speed of traffic moving in the same direction at such time, and is
not being driven in the right-hand lane for traffic or as close as
practicable to the right-hand edge or curb, it shall constitute prima
facie evidence that the driver is operating the vehicle in violation
of subdivision (a) of this section." (Subdivision (a)'s first phrase is 'notwithstanding the speed limit')

Basically, obstructing the normal flow of traffic is likely to get you done in.

Another example of the speed limit not being an absolute is, for example,when travelling at 55mph on a single lane 55mph road, and you encounter something doing 53mph. It is permitted to exceed the speed limit (Generally by 10mph) when overtaking because crawling past at only 2mph is more dangerous.

NTM

SouperComputer

Nobody can argue that speed is not the main killer on our roads.

Speed doesn’t kill. Inappropriate speed is ONE possible cause amongst many of accidents and there is a major difference.

I find it interesting the scapegoat that "speeding" has become. I have to laugh at the TV shows preaching about speeding, and yet the incident involves a lunatic running a red light at 40MPH or whatever. That has nothing to do with speeding whatsoever!

Speed or speeding is an easy target as it can be quantified, but IMO the real issue is people's attitude and understanding towards\of driving. This of course is much more difficult to judge and to apportion blame in a post-mortem (not neccarily in the death sense) situation.

The risks\dangers don’t get necessarily higher because you have crossed a legal limit. Yes, reaction distances increase obviously, but this is where inappropriate use of speed comes in, it has nothing to do with the legal limit.

As a few people pointed out, this "exercise" was illegal, provocative and unnecessary. Also, chances are they were probably driving nearer 50MPH if they were using their vehicle's speedo's to judge their speed.

py2006

jdwals wrote:

Actually, I for one would be delighted if people obeyed the speed limit. And when I say this, I mean actually drive at the maximum speed allowed! If the road lets you drive at 100kph - then bloody well drive at 100kph! (Weather and road conditions allowing!)
Not 80kph or even 60kph but 100kph!
The type of driving that pi**es me off the most is when I have to drive from Dublin to Kerry and back and get stuck behind some idiot travelling as low as 40kph (yes, they are out there) below the posted speed limit and I can't get past them either due to traffic, lack of overtaking stretches or more likely the tendency of these slower drivers to be so far into the middle of the road, they may as well be driving on the other side of it!
If on the other hand someone is going above the speed limit, I give them as much space as I can to safely overtake and let them on their way. That way, they are happy, I am happy - everyone is happy!

I think the key word here that some people forget is the word LIMIT!! 100km/h is the LIMIT. That means the fastest you can go. It doesn't actually mean that you must drive at that speed all the time and don't go any slower.

People who go a little slower than that are not doing anything wrong. Even though it can be annoying to people who want to speed.

Manic Moran

SouperComputer wrote:

The risks\dangers don’t get necessarily higher because you have crossed a legal limit. Yes, reaction distances increase obviously, but this is where inappropriate use of speed comes in, it has nothing to do with the legal limit

Again, in California: Highway 101 was designed back in the pre-Federally-mandated speed limit days to allow people to get from San Francisco to LA at an average speed of about 90mph. It is possible to get off a speeding ticket in California if you can show that you were not exceeding the safe speed for the road given the road conditions, state of your vehicle, and so on, so speeding tickets on 101 at anything less than 80mph are rare, simply because they can be thrown out fairly easily.

Also, chances are they were probably driving nearer 50MPH if they were using their vehicle's speedo's to judge their speed.

Fair point, though I'm not sure if American manufacturers are held to the (I think German) law that a speedo cannot show less than what you are doing, so there may not be any attempt at a fudge factor.

Manic Moran

py2006 wrote:

I think the key word here that some people forget is the word LIMIT!! 100km/h is the LIMIT. That means the fastest you can go. It doesn't actually mean that you must drive at that speed all the time and don't go any slower.

People who go a little slower than that are not doing anything wrong. Even though it can be annoying to people who want to speed.

Again, representative law from my state (Since the movie is presumably an American one). I make no statement as to if similar laws are in Ireland.

21656. On a two-lane highway where passing is unsafe because of
traffic in the opposite direction or other conditions, a slow-moving
vehicle, including a passenger vehicle, behind which five or more
vehicles are formed in line, shall turn off the roadway at the
nearest place designated as a turnout by signs erected by the
authority having jurisdiction over the highway, or wherever
sufficient area for a safe turnout exists, in order to permit the
vehicles following it to proceed. As used in this section a
slow-moving vehicle is one which is proceeding at a rate of speed
less than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time and
place.

Again, my bold. Some vehicle tooling along with a caravan or a truck is legally obliged to let people behind pass, by pulling off the road and stopping if required. Note again, the use of 'normal' flow of traffic, with no reference whatsoever to the speed limit.

NTM

cooperguy

ruprect wrote:

if both cars are 2 abreast on the motorway driving at the speed limit, then there is nothing any highway patrol could do. One is trying to pass out the other and not breaking the law. I doubt the one on the inside is breaking the law, just common sense.

No it is against the law if you are unable to pass the car in front of you while staying within the limit then you are not supposed to be in the outside lane. The idea of both cars travelling at the same speed and the outside one is trying to overtake is not legal, if you cannot overtake then you shouldnt be there

mackerski

robinph wrote:

That isn't a minimum speed limit though, its that your vehicle has to be capable of travelling at at least that speed not that you have to keep to at least that speed. The only place I'm aware of minimum limits is on the outside lanes of the autobahn.

There is not, as a rule, any minimum speed mandated for the outside lane of an Autobahn. Very occasionally, typically on steep uphill stretches with 3 lanes or more, a minimum speed will be posted, using standard signage (blue disc) for all but the right-most lane.

Commander Vimes wrote:

the slow lane is for people who drive below the limit. if someone was driving at the limit and pulled into the slow lane, they'd be breaking the law.

I wouldn't have thought it possible to pack so many incorrect assertions into such a small space. Not a fact anywhere to be seen.

Dermot

johnnyrotten

bounty wrote:

no, its the fast and slow lane, everyone knows that

No, its the Inside lane and Overtaking lane, Everyone knows that, Ask Gay Byrne:p

maidhc

Oh how I would love to do that on the N25 and N8. I think 50mph would be reasonable. (If I wanted to be unreasonable I could bring out my tractor!)

They might then change the signposts to blue!

Guy:Incognito

py2006 wrote:

I think the key word here that some people forget is the word LIMIT!! 100km/h is the LIMIT. That means the fastest you can go. It doesn't actually mean that you must drive at that speed all the time and don't go any slower.

People who go a little slower than that are not doing anything wrong. Even though it can be annoying to people who want to speed.

To keep a proper flow of traffic people should drive at the speed limit. Anyone who argues against this go see the chaos that is th eM50 with people pootling along at 60 - 80 km. It's ridiculous.

Also these people don't know how to merge. If the traffic on the motorway is travelling at 120km's you DO NOT merge at 80km, it's dangerous. I wouldnt be able to count the number of people I see everyday who breka to merge, what sort of idiots are these. You merge with traffic at the speed its going, not th espeed you think everyone should have to break heavily down to because you've graced the road with your presence.

I've driven up the north a few times recently from dublin. Not sure of road names but its the main road that begins as the M1 I think and is mostly motorway. Most people seem to drive at around 130km which keeps the traffic moveing brilliantly with most of the traffic that is moving slower, but mostly around 110 -120km , occuping the left lane so others can overtake. Yet on the way back when the carsthat are going to the M50 turn onto it, some drive the same, while others revert to idiot mode like the traffic already on the M50 and drive at 80km, thus keeping the whole M50 moving at 80 -100km. I rarely manage to get up to 120kms on the M50 anymore.

Commander Vimes wrote:

i doubt that would happen. the slow lane is for people who drive below the limit. if someone was driving at the limit and pulled into the slow lane, they'd be breaking the law.

This proves that people in this country havnt a clue how to use motorways and should take it upon themselves, seeign as the government wont do it for them, to go to another country to be thouaght how to use them.

In a way it's not the fault of most people as it's not part of learnign to drive, but tbh I learned by a combination of a bit fo cop on (which seems to be severly lackking here) and by observign people in countries whre they know how to use motorways (mostly Germany)

TempestSabre

The problem it that the odds of the guards enforcing the rules and getting caught is so slim most people ignore the rules. Until that issue is resolved you won't improve peoples driving.

samb

I'm new on the roads, and I can't believe how much people speed. I try to stick to the limit which I think is generally a reasonable speed, but very quickly find a line of cars behind eagerly waiting for a straight patch of road to overtake. 100Kph is fine for these roads. Also I often find that when we reach a town or village, I am just behind those who overtook me.

Please, stick to the limits.

mackerski

samb wrote:

I'm new on the roads,

samb wrote:

which I think is generally a reasonable speed,

samb wrote:

100Kph is fine for these roads.

That's us told...

Dermot

On the subject of speed limits, the gards are out speed checking on a stretch of good road on the Naas kilcullen road that used to be 60mph speed limit.

The speed limit on this road is now 50mph or 80kph because technically it is a regional road.

It is is clear they are only there for revenue collection purposes as the road hasn't suddenly got more dangerous since the change over to metric, nor is it anywhere near a built up area.

cargrouch

samb wrote:

I try to stick to the limit which I think is generally a reasonable speed, but very quickly find a line of cars behind eagerly waiting for a straight patch of road to overtake.

I don't mind someone doing even 10kph below the limit* if they pull over when they see a build up of traffic. No, they are not obliged to, but if they're not in a hurry then there's no harm is there?

BTW, on the flip side I also completely object to (**cough** Beemer **cough**) drivers rubbing off someones back bumper trying to force them to speed up/pull over. Maintain a reasonable distance, overtake when possible.

*Disclaimer - this applies in good driving conditions. Bad weather at night on country roads = below the limit, end of story.

grizi

Oh don't start with this "it's all about making money" lark. There was a minister for road safety on Top Gear before Christmas who faced up to Jeremy Clarkson on speed cameras and fines etc. Even Jeremy had to admit the amount of money taken in was tiny, not even worth talking about and the UK is littered with cameras. So unless you can produce some figures to show how the government is raking in money from easy speed fines then drop it.

Personally I think what they did in the US was crazy but maybe not illegal. I would presume that references to the normal speed of traffic are for traffic moving at less than or equal to the limit, i.e. avoid a string of really slow cars slowing people moving close to the limit. In the US too I understand that they don't have the same concept of the "overtaking" lane and you can have 3 or 4 lanes moving at pretty much the same speed.

If the speed limit in your area is inappropriate what have you done about it? How about finding out about how to change it. Go to transport.ie, roads section and then road safety - wouldn't you know it, there's a report from the working group on reviewing speed limits!
Also in that report and a simple guide to speed limits on http://oasis.gov.ie/transport/motoring/road_traffic_speed_limits_in_ireland.html mention that local authorities can change speed limits (although its normally down rather than up)

Also - what about less powerful cars? Have you any idea how long it takes a 998cc car to get up to 120km/h? Insisting that they must merge with the motorway at this speed is fairly demanding but obviously it is best to try to get up to speed as soon as you can

mackerski

grizi wrote:

Also - what about less powerful cars? Have you any idea how long it takes a 998cc car to get up to 120km/h? Insisting that they must merge with the motorway at this speed is fairly demanding but obviously it is best to try to get up to speed as soon as you can

Irish slip roads are very long, and usually downhill for traffic entering the motorway. A less powerful car will have trouble merging at 120 if the driver piddles down the entire slip road at 60 and waits until he's in the acceleration lane. What you need to do, especially if your car is a bit less oomphy, is to wait until you're past the blue sign and then step on it.

Dermot

SouperComputer

Also - what about less powerful cars? Have you any idea how long it takes a 998cc car to get up to 120km/h?

That's one of the reasons for the ramps. In reality, the left lane is rarely doing 120k's, usually at most 100 at busy times and somtimes 80 or less. The problem is not the car, its the driver.

They fail to correctly read the speed of the lane and match it. If im driving a puny car, I will usually boot it until I can see the traffic flow and brake/slow if needed, although this is rare as you can usually get away with modulating the power. This is provided of course I dont have cars too close in front or behind.

maidhc

grizi wrote:

If the speed limit in your area is inappropriate what have you done about it?

Sadly all the "speeding kills" propaganda has probably ruled this out. Every day I drive roads that are crying out for a 120kmph limit, but have a 100kmph one, but if the County Council raised the limit they would be attaked by hoardes of finger-waggers.

grizi wrote:

Also - what about less powerful cars? Have you any idea how long it takes a 998cc car to get up to 120km/h? Insisting that they must merge with the motorway at this speed is fairly demanding but obviously it is best to try to get up to speed as soon as you can

I dont see how this is relevant at all! You pay your money and take your choice!

mackerski

maidhc wrote:

Sadly all the "speeding kills" propaganda has probably ruled this out. Every day I drive roads that are crying out for a 120kmph limit, but have a 100kmph one, but if the County Council raised the limit they would be attaked by hoardes of finger-waggers.

The new N2 will have a 120 limit on the bulk of the mainline. Let's hope this isn't an isolated incident.

Dermot

Gegerty

SouperComputer wrote:

Speed doesn’t kill. Inappropriate speed is ONE possible cause amongst many of accidents and there is a major difference.

I find it interesting the scapegoat that "speeding" has become. I have to laugh at the TV shows preaching about speeding, and yet the incident involves a lunatic running a red light at 40MPH or whatever. That has nothing to do with speeding whatsoever!

Speed or speeding is an easy target as it can be quantified, but IMO the real issue is people's attitude and understanding towards\of driving. This of course is much more difficult to judge and to apportion blame in a post-mortem (not neccarily in the death sense) situation.

The risks\dangers don’t get necessarily higher because you have crossed a legal limit. Yes, reaction distances increase obviously, but this is where inappropriate use of speed comes in, it has nothing to do with the legal limit.

As a few people pointed out, this "exercise" was illegal, provocative and unnecessary. Also, chances are they were probably driving nearer 50MPH if they were using their vehicle's speedo's to judge their speed.

Speed is the difference between having time to react and not, its the difference between damaging someones car and damaging someones skull, its the difference between life and death in many accidents. My brother was mushed by an SUV. If only the silly cow wasn't speeding everything would be fine. There are many families saying the same thing. "If only he was going slower". If only people would cop on.

Believe it or not I venture out beyond the pale now and again. It's frustrating getting stuck behind someone "going slow". I'd wager a guess that if you check your speedo you'll see that they're not "going slow" but actually they're sticking to the limit. Unfortunately alot of our roads are too dangerous to overtake and you can travel KM's before getting a chance and even then there'll probably be traffic coming the other way. Again all I can say is get over it.

Another thing, you may think a person is going slow but to them they could be going very fast. What are they to do? Should your dash have an electronic display saying "I like to drive faster so speed up or I'll get angry and do something stupid!"?

I do agree with you that peoples attitudes need to change and is a major factor. Including peoples attutude to speed though.

spockety

Deleted User wrote:

I would imagine one or the other could be done for driving without due care and attention for other users of the road. The rules of the road certainly state that you should not accelerate if a car is overtaking you. If someone is accelrating enough to get by but suddenly both cars are travelling at the same speed, then clearly one or other has declerated to cause the obstruction.

Not necessarily!

What if someone is coming down the on-ramp to a motorway, accelerates to 120kph, and as they reach the bottom of it, they happen to be exactly in line with a car in the driving lane who is also doing exactly 120kph? that car pulls over into the overtaking lane to allow enough room for the car enetering the motorway to get onto it safely. You then have 2 cars going exactly the same speed abreast of each other, with no one having to have decelerated or broken the law! ;-)